1. Automation in clinical bacteriology: what system to choose?
G. Greub, G. Prod’hom 
Clinical Microbiology and Infection 
Volume 17, Issue 5, Pages (May 2011)
DOI: /j x
Copyright © 2011 European Society of Clinical Infectious Diseases Terms and Conditions

2. Fig. 1
Partition (%) of the workload in our bacteriology laboratory at the sample reception unit. Time was assessed by self‐reporting ongoing activity at 15‐min intervals; activities had to be assigned to one of the seven categories presented on the graph. Note that as much as 24% of technician time is devoted to the inoculation of agar plates and broths. LIS, laboratory information system; TB, tuberculosis.
Clinical Microbiology and Infection  , DOI: ( /j x)
Copyright © 2011 European Society of Clinical Infectious Diseases Terms and Conditions

3. Fig. 2
Agar plates inoculated (a) with Previ‐Isola, (b) with WASP, (c) withInoqula, and (d) manually. Note that isolated colonies were generally obtained, although high inocula were tested (about 106 bacteria/mL). The use of the Previ‐Isola comb leads to circular semiquantitative inoculation (a), whereas, with WASP and Inoqula, both single‐streaking (b, d) and four‐quadrant inoculation (not shown) may be performed. Only 1 μL of urine was inoculated with the Inoqula bead (c), whereas 10 μL of the same urine was inoculated manually (d). Note that automated inoculation allow us to obtain more isolated colonies than manual inoculation, at least with Previ‐Isola and Inoqula (Rice and Baruch, 109th ASM, 2009, Poster C064; Sturm et al., 20th ECCMID, 2010, Poster 1766).
Clinical Microbiology and Infection  , DOI: ( /j x)
Copyright © 2011 European Society of Clinical Infectious Diseases Terms and Conditions

4. Fig. 3
Partition in percentage of the arrival of the specimen for processing (working hours 08:00–17:00).
Clinical Microbiology and Infection  , DOI: ( /j x)
Copyright © 2011 European Society of Clinical Infectious Diseases Terms and Conditions